The majority of 922 prediction models supporting breast cancer decision-making are at high risk of bias

To systematically review the currently available prediction models that may support treatment decision-making in breast cancer. Literature was systematically searched to identify studies reporting on development of prediction models aiming to support breast cancer treatment decision-making, publishe...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of clinical epidemiology 2022-12, Vol.152, p.238-247
Hauptverfasser: Hueting, Tom A., van Maaren, Marissa C., Hendriks, Mathijs P., Koffijberg, Hendrik, Siesling, Sabine
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:To systematically review the currently available prediction models that may support treatment decision-making in breast cancer. Literature was systematically searched to identify studies reporting on development of prediction models aiming to support breast cancer treatment decision-making, published between January 2010 and December 2020. Quality and risk of bias were assessed using the Prediction model Risk Of Bias (ROB) Assessment Tool (PROBAST). After screening 20,460 studies, 534 studies were included, reporting on 922 models. The 922 models predicted: mortality (n = 417 45%), recurrence (n = 217, 24%), lymph node involvement (n = 141, 15%), adverse events (n = 58, 6%), treatment response (n = 56, 6%), or other outcomes (n = 33, 4%). In total, 285 models (31%) lacked a complete description of the final model and could not be applied to new patients. Most models (n = 878, 95%) were considered to contain high ROB. A substantial overlap in predictor variables and outcomes between the models was observed. Most models were not reported according to established reporting guidelines or showed methodological flaws during the development and/or validation of the model. Further development of prediction models with thorough quality and validity assessment is an essential first step for future clinical application.
ISSN:0895-4356
1878-5921
DOI:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.10.016